LETTER – For $4 a household, optics win out over common sense on climate levy
(Image: Drive BC)
My thoughts on Tuesday’s Council decision to back off on the Climate Action Levy:
Like a lot of communities, it took Kamloops a heck of a long time to: a) Get a climate action plan and b) Get funding for it. The plan was unanimously approved in 2021 (on the day the temperature reached an astounding and not-long-term-survivable 47.3 degrees—and within 24 hours of the incineration of the town of Lytton).
We needed at least 0.5%/year to even make a dent, but there was insufficient appetite for that hike all at once. Staff found a compromise by starting with 0.35%, and ramping it up annually, stating that the levy needed to be in place at least 10 years. Not ideal, but at least it was a start.
That funding has been in place only two years, and now a less visionary Council has decided that it’s not that important after all.
As one of the many people who has been fighting this battle for over 10 years, I can’t tell you how disheartening Tuesday’s decision is. For a paltry $4/household ($220K in total), Council decided that optics should win out over common sense.
Research shows that every $1 invested by government means a savings of $13-$15 down the line. Climate action is one of the best returns on investment this City could be making.
Instead, we are once again kicking the can down the road to our kids — who can’t even afford houses, forget climate-related disasters.
I sincerely hope that Council rethinks this one and reinstates the full amount of the Climate Action Levy. When it comes to this issue, later is too late.
We lost over 600 people in B.C. during that heat dome. We lost hundreds of homes in wildfires. Our fruit crops are largely destroyed this year because of instability in the freeze/thaw cycle.
WHAT WILL IT TAKE BEFORE CLIMATE ACTION BECOMES PRIORITY #1?
GISELA RUCKERT
ArmchairMayor.ca 
Coun. Bill Sarai has duly noted your criticism of this decision.
LikeLike
From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and from him who has been entrusted with much, even more will be demanded.
What country on earth has been given more than us? We have amongst the cleanest air, abundance of water, safest streets, highest standard of living, greatest longevity, etc, etc. We also are amongst the most heavily impacted countries in the negative consequences from the thawing ice caps in out arctic lands to the spread in summer wild fires. If we don’t lead then who will?
LikeLiked by 2 people
If think the obvious question is if we lead, who will follow? Certainly not developing economies which will be the worst and largest polluters for the next century. China will not willingly hobble its economy either.
LikeLike
Anyone that thinks a local climate levy will do anything to impact climate change needs a dose of reality. As mentioned elsewhere, rail, the pulp mill and trucking dump massive amounts of carbon into the air. The decision of council was to acknowledge the total futility and infinitesimally small impact that levy would theoretically make, and return some money into cash-strapped taxpayers.
Miss Ruckert said it herself – people can’t afforded houses. And your answer is to tax them further? $4 here. $18 there. The problem with numbers is that they add up.
We already do our small part to reduce impacts to climate. But taxing people to address something that doesn’t respect borders is futile unless the whole world is doing the same thing we are. If you think a $4 surcharge is going to impact fires, grapes and flooding/drought, I have a bridge to sell you.
We had a massive unexpected drop in emissions during Covid, did that do anything? Doesn’t seem so. So why not take that free reduction and give taxpayers a break?
LikeLike
Exactly. What with the 7 million dollars being considered for a feasability study for a performing arts centre and 220K denied the Climate Action Levy, we are like Nero fiddling while Rome burns.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hear, hear. Carbon reduction is much more important than, say, a part-time outdoor skating surface in one of the warmest and hardest to police areas of the city. Why didn’t council cancel that instead?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly.
LikeLike
LikeLike