Environmental Policy Must Serve Canada

Commentary

Ottawa’s internal environmental debate has become disconnected from a fundamental principle of good government: the purpose of environmental policy is not simply to reduce emissions, but to reduce emissions while preserving the conditions that allow Canadians to prosper.

A government has many responsibilities. It must protect the environment. It must also protect jobs, strengthen productivity, maintain affordable energy, safeguard national security, and preserve Canada’s competitiveness in an increasingly uncertain world. Environmental policy cannot be pursued in isolation from these broader national interests.

That is the crossroads Canada now faces. For nearly a decade, federal climate policy has been dominated by carbon taxes, emissions targets, subsidies, mandates, and increasingly ambitious promises. Yet Canada remains off track to meet its 2030 emissions target, with greenhouse gas emissions still standing at approximately 708 megatons annually.

The problem is not that Canada has acted. The problem is that environmental policy has too often been treated as separate from economic reality. At a time when Canada’s productivity growth has stalled and GDP per capita has declined relative to many peer nations, public policy should strengthen economic performance, not weaken it.

Perspective matters. Canada accounts for approximately 1.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. China accounts for roughly 30 percent. India continues to expand its emissions as its economy grows. Russia remains one of the world’s largest hydrocarbon producers and exporters. Even if Canada achieved net zero tomorrow, the global climate challenge would remain overwhelmingly dependent on decisions made elsewhere.

These facts do not absolve Canada of responsibility. They do, however, demand realism. Policies that significantly reduce Canadian productivity, discourage investment, eliminate high-paying jobs, or increase dependence on foreign supply chains may impose substantial domestic costs while delivering only marginal global environmental benefits.

Climate policy cannot become an exercise in national self-impoverishment. Nor can it increase Canada’s strategic dependence on countries whose interests do not align with our own. The energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine demonstrated the dangers of relying on authoritarian regimes for essential resources. Growing dependence on Chinese manufacturing and critical mineral processing presents similar vulnerabilities.

Canada possesses significant advantages that should form the foundation of a serious environmental strategy. More than 80 percent of our electricity already comes from non-emitting sources, among the cleanest electricity systems in the industrialized world. We are a leading producer of uranium, possess vast hydroelectric resources, and hold substantial reserves of critical minerals required for electrification and advanced manufacturing.

Canada’s resource sector should be viewed as a strategic asset, not a liability. The oil and gas industry contributes approximately 7–8 percent of national GDP, supports more than 900,000 direct and indirect jobs, and generates billions in annual government revenues. Weakening such a sector without a viable replacement would not strengthen Canada’s environmental position. It would weaken the country’s economic position.

The better path is one rooted in Canadian strengths: accelerating nuclear development, expanding transmission infrastructure, supporting carbon capture technologies, reducing methane emissions, modernizing industrial processes, and responsibly developing critical minerals. These initiatives would reduce emissions while simultaneously strengthening economic growth and national competitiveness.

Adaptation must also receive greater attention. The 2023 wildfire season burned more than 18.5 million hectares, the largest area ever recorded in Canada. Floods, storms, and northern infrastructure damage are becoming more frequent and more costly. Governments must invest not only in mitigation, but also in protecting communities from the impacts already occurring.

The measure of success should not be how much economic activity Canada eliminates. The measure of success should be how much emissions reduction Canada achieves while increasing prosperity, maintaining full employment, strengthening national security, and preserving Canadian sovereignty.

Environmental stewardship matters. But stewardship divorced from productivity, prosperity, and statecraft is not a strategy. It is an illusion.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.