Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism.
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); } //

If ever there were an establishment Republican, George Shultz would be the man.

After receiving his PhD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and teaching economics there for some years, he became U.S. secretary of labour, director of the Office of Management and Budget, secretary of the treasury and president Ronald Reagan's secretary of state from 1982 to 1989. Since then, Mr. Shultz has been at Stanford, hardly a hotbed of radicalism, while serving on various boards of large corporations.

Mr. Shultz will turn 94 next month, but his interest in public issues persists. His latest interest is climate change. He's bought an electric car, placed solar panels on his house and has been telling those in his party and beyond: "The climate is changing. If you don't like the science, use your eyes."

Story continues below advertisement

What to do? Mr. Shultz favours two approaches. First, increased government funding on clean technology research. Second, a revenue-neutral carbon tax, of the kind British Columbia implemented in 2008.

Imagine that from a pillar of Republicanism – a plea for a revenue-neutral carbon tax. Most Republican politicians run from the issue of climate change, their latest dodge being that they are not scientists and therefore cannot have an opinion on the science.

Heads in the ground, they dismiss last week's fifth report of the International Panel on Climate Change, which reported with more urgency and certainty than ever that the Earth is warming due to man-made emissions, principally from the burning of fossil fuels. The consequences for humanity will be grave, said the IPCC.

In that assessment, the panel agrees with Mr. Shultz, who has said that his two preferred policy choices – research and a carbon tax – will be far less costly than the long-term expense of dealing with climate change.

Six weeks ago, 73 countries, 22 subnational jurisdictions and more than 1,000 companies and investors signed one of four documents: the Put a Price on Carbon Statement, the Carbon Price Communiqué, the Caring for Climate Initiative and the 2014 Global Investor Statement on Climate Change.

The latter statement, whose 347 institutional investors include such leftist hotbeds as Rockefeller Asset Management, BlackRock and Paribas Investment Partners, called for governments to "provide stable, reliable and economically meaningful carbon pricing that helps redirect investment commensurate with the scale of the climate-change challenge."

In Canada this week, a group of economists from across the discipline, under the direction of a board of directors ranging from former Reform Party leader Preston Manning to former B.C. NDP premier Mike Harcourt, launched a "commission" to produce research and public papers on carbon pricing over the next five years.

Story continues below advertisement

The board and economists hope – hopefully not against hope – to influence public debate, which shut down after Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives destroyed the Liberals under Stéphane Dion, who had proposed a carbon tax.

Mr. Dion's idea, alas, included using revenue from such a tax for social programs. The much wiser approach, favoured by everyone from Mr. Shultz to the international supporters to the B.C. government, is to return all funds from the carbon tax to individuals and businesses in the form of lower taxes.

The Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers have both gingerly suggested carbon pricing, without saying how or when.

CAPP is always a lowest-common-denominator organization with so many different members. Some, such as Esso, have parent companies (Exxon Mobil) that have publicly supported a price on carbon, while others fiercely oppose one. Inside the industry, huge multinationals such as Exxon Mobil and Shell are already factoring a carbon price of $40 to $60 a tonne into their long-term planning.

Canada's Conservatives, who are supposed to like free-market solutions and use tax policy to influence behaviour, prefer to deal with carbon through what they otherwise decry, regulation. Of course, the Conservatives have never produced any regulation on the oil-and-gas industry, and their regulations on coal are long-term and rather lame.

Some day, the Conservatives will be gone from office, at which time a more serious national debate will begin about dealing with the long-term cost of carbon emissions by taxing them, and returning the money in the form of lower taxes on individuals and businesses.

Story continues below advertisement

With Mr. Shultz and Mr. Manning in favour, at least there are a couple of conservatives who don't have their heads in the sand.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies