Thread by @khar1958

In anticipation of a possible 2021 Canadian election, with a new fed climate plan on the table, and a new Paris Ag target to come by April, some thoughts on partisanship and #climate. Bear with me for 🧵, two proposals at end. #canpoli /1

It's tempting and easy to play partisan politics with climate for 5 reasons. 1. Most voters have no idea how far current policies are from what's needed. So parties still debate marginal policy shifts even as they *say* they are committed to 2/1.5C. /2

2. Climate action will have uneven costs on sectors, workers, provinces. They fight change. The oil ind has spent big $ on denial, obfuscation - with success. Parties still want those votes so are afraid to tell the truth. There WILL be new jobs but beneficiaries are unknown /3

3. Voters want to believe we can fix climate without costing them money, so welcome proposals that promise all reductions will come from industry. Industry is only ½ of Canada’s emissions, so can’t get us to net zero. Even in short term, that would be devastating to economy /4

4. Voters (and business) love subsidies, so it's easy to bribe us with our own $$. After all these yrs, media coverage of platforms/plans still focuses on the price tag, rather than regulations. Govt spending is needed, incl for low-income, but we won't fix climate with tax $ /5

5. Carbon pricing is unfamiliar, so it’s easy to tell people that it "won’t work," is "unfair" to them or their province, "can’t trust" rebates. It’s easy to pretend that regulations - with higher costs - won’t be passed on to consumers. They will. They should. Pols know it. /6

6. Uncertainty about the prospect of future innovations lowering mitigation costs. That tempts pols to hide behind the promise of magical future solutions, like CCS and NETs. That's a very risky strategy with our kids' future. But a happy story is an easier sell. /7

We have seen how this plays out time and time again, in Canada and other FF-intensive countries. NDP fought BC's C tax. Fed NDP emphasizes spending. Conservs promised to meet goals only via industry. Libs many times promised real action but only delivered on the happy stuff. /8

Proposal 1 for parties. Resist the temptation to mislead voters. Aim high not low. The stakes are too damned high for your own kids. Commit to a multi-party approach (or cit assembly?), contingent on credible trajectory to net zero in 2050. It has been done in other countries!/9

OK, may be too optimistic, and real diffs in ambition, ideology. Fair enough! Proposal 2. Agree to submit all your climate platforms for analysis by the same, credible 3rd party, such as PBO. Show what your plan will do, at what cost, to whom. If not, what are you hiding? fin

Ran out of space for the Greens. They've been more forthcoming -- including acknowleding need for ~$200 C price back in 2000s. Most committed, but also not in competition for climate deniers' votes. But fewer resources than bigger parties for policy modelling.